Skeptics Only: Get Crazy!

I've been here for a while now, mostly reading "believers" stuff which get subsequentialy bashed by skeptics.
But obviously there are very few threads started by skeptics in comparison to believers.
So I would like to see the other side of the issue and ask skeptics to cross to the wild side of their imagination, and the question is: What would make what believers say true? What machination, distortion of reality, or whatever you may call it, do you have to come up with in order to validate what believers say about:

1) The government is hiding alien tech

2) The government is hiding live/dead aliens

3) Men never set foot on the Moon (deadly radiation, poor tech, fabricated images etc.)

4) NWO is real and is evil

5) 9/11 is an inside job

6) Food conspiracies (fluoride, chemicals, etc.) are there to reduce population

7) Paranormal activities are real, either because of the mind or the spirit world

8) There were advanced prehistoric civilizations (Pyramids not built by egyptians, Baghdad battery, Atlantis, etc.)

9) We are seeing Alien UFO's, or Future Men's UFO's

10) HAARP controls weather.

That's a compilation of things I found interesting for some time now, I left some others aside since it's quite a list.
Please don't make ironic remarks, the objective is, from your point of view, what would have to happen/how things would have to be in order for these things to be true.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by seb2882]

Originally posted by seb2882
I've been here for a while now, mostly reading "believers" stuff which get subsequentialy bashed by skeptics.
But obviously there are very few threads started by skeptics in comparison to believers.
So I would like to see the other side of the issue and ask skeptics to cross to the wild side of their imagination, and the question is: What would make what believers say true? What machination, distortion of reality, or whatever you may call it, do you have to come up with in order to validate what believers say about:

I think this answer would be different for every person. I’m not going through each topic to tell you what it would take for them. I will tell you what it takes for me in general to start to believe.


For me I don’t always need "solid" proof. A good argument on the subject helps. a person who has passion for a subject, but can discuss it with some intelligence and doesn’t get mad and start slamming someone who doesn’t agree right away. but I will admit like many people there are some subjects where I am dead set in my ways and short of setting undeniable proof in my lap I would not change my view.

there are allot of thing I didn’t believe in until I came to this site and some one said something that just hit me in a way I started to accept the fact that strange things do happen and I am wrong from time to time…

What would it take for me to believe any of those? Proof. As they are extremely unlikely, that proof would have to be impressive to the extreme. In the words of Marlon Brando, "What ya got?"

Thanks for the replies. I don't consider myself a skeptic nor a believer, and I believe very few people are hardcore skeptics or believers, because all of us have our own doubts and beliefs. But my point is, if one of these subjects is of your interest, then tell me what could make it plausible.
For instance, let's say I believe that mankind can and is travelling faster than the speed of light, there is an elite group which is doing this. I have no proof whatsoever. You would of course tell me to get some proof, because that violates our conventional understanding of physics. What I ask instead, is for you to tell what has to happen for this to be true.

I will play the devil's advocate and throw in a few common beliefs on these subjects. I don't necessarily believe in these, but some of them are worth the thought. I will keep it to the most in-the-box stuff and let the outrageous out.

1) Gov't hiding alien tech: We have developed enormously fast on the last 100 years, arguably more than ever in history by leaps and bounds. We couldn't possibly made it alone. There are witnesses of the Roswell crash, Hitler experimented with UFO's and Nazi scientists where secretly brought to the US to share their research.

2) Gov't hiding aliens: Roswell crash. That russian crash too. They let aliens experiment with humans in exchange for tech. Aliens mutilate cows in a strange manner, a phenomena which has yet hypothetical "terrestrial" explanations. Aliens do the crop circles, because even if people could make them, it's a very complicated issue and they multiply by the thousands, some appear overnight. The face and pyramids on Mars were true, and then the latest pictures are faked to dismiss the whole thing by making it a false composition of shadows.

3) Men never went to the Moon: they would be killed by radiation, or a solar flare, or crashed with space debris. They used ancient tech, the space module had lesser memory than today's washing machines. Pictures are hoaxed, made on a studio, for numerous reasons. Or maybe they went to the Moon but don't want to show you what is really there. (Related to 1)

4) NWO is real and evil: There are powermongering individuals who seek to control world's economy. Namely the petrol and banking cartels. They are psychopath, don't have conscience so they do what they please with no remorse. They are governing behind the scenes since forever, or since Weishaupt and the Illuminati. Their plan is to get more powerful and govern the whole world someday, by destroying individual rights and keeping a pyramidal structure where everyone is levelled on the lower lever and they're on the top. They made women independance to get double workforce and lower wages for everyone, Aaron Russo told it. They carry the same bloodlines which proves for how long they've been in power.

5) 9/11 is an inside job: Structures fell according to an explosion, not a plane crash. There is no airplane debris left on the Pentagon attack. WTC 7 was a block away and still got destroyed by a controlled demolition. They staged a massive evacuation prior to this, where they planted the explosives. They did this because they needed an excuse to secure Afghanistan to make oil/gas pipes towards the ocean, and for the companies TPTB have to make even more rich with millionaire reconstruction contracts which they never accomplished, but kept the money. (Related to 4) They did this because they have to wage war on an invisible enemy, so we unite as a whole world against this thread ("Either you're with us, or against us")

6) Food conspiracies: Fluoride is an unnecesary hazard. Global companies control seeds, which they modify knowingly for the purpose of spreading new diseases, or they don't care and just make them more productive and the hell with our health. The Codex Alimentary is due to happen at Q4 2009 which will start the end of the independent farmer and put us all under TPTB food regime. (Related to 4)

7) Paranormal activities: there are documented cases of unexplainable phenomena. Precognitions actually helped to solve some crimes. There are spirits who manifest themselves by means of visual contact, or psychophony, imaging, and other electronic mediums. The mind is the gate to a higher realm of laws of the universe, where you can do amazing things.

8) Advanced prehistoric Civ's: We can't build pyramids, yet the Egyptians did. The Mayans built them too and were very far away to be culturally linked. The aztec said they came from "Aztlan", curiously similar to "Atlantis". Every ancient culture has similar flood tales, as if everyone came from the same place. These tales also talk about very powerful tech, nuclear wars, flight, space travel and even more advanced stuff.
The Sphinx is older than the pyramids, it has rain erosion and was faced to an ancient sea. There are objects which defy its age: the baghdad battery, the crystal skulls, pyramids, Nazca lines, perfectly stone-cut megalithic walls, etc.

9) UFO's are Aliens or ourselves in the future: We don't have the tech to build them so they must be of a superior, more advanced culture. They are not plasma/phsyical explanations since they look metallic and look like an object. They make coherent movements as well. Since they're airbone objects, they can be space visitors. Or their elusive maneuvers can be because they're from the future and don't want to interfere with history so it could be changed.

10) HAARP controls weather: HAARP creates a microwave-like effect in the upper atmosphere. This is the trick they use when they want to make us believe in Global Warming. We're actually heading for an ice age. They made Katrina, El Niño, droughts and storms everywhere with this tech. It was developed as a means to a new war technology.(Related to 4 somehow)

If anyone wishes to further these points feel welcome: I only highlighted what I remember as interesting discussions.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by seb2882]

Originally posted by seb2882
For instance, let's say I believe that mankind can and is travelling faster than the speed of light, there is an elite group which is doing this. I have no proof whatsoever. You would of course tell me to get some proof, because that violates our conventional understanding of physics. What I ask instead, is for you to tell what has to happen for this to be true.

Well, I think what makes things like this "plausible" is because its is a known fact, that what ever technology is available to the public the government has had for years. At any given time this "classified" Technology is any where between 15 and 50 years more advanced. Any one who has had any kind of security clearance in the Military or other government agencies could tell you this. they usually don’t release it to the public until it is almost obsolete to them. When I was in the Army we trained on a new armored vehicle, that is still classified and never went into production as far as I know. I still have friends in the service that trained on this equipment with me and said they never saw it again. anyways my point is that this thing was amazing it had GPS, targeting, and other systems that blew my mind. it was incredible.

another thing is the CCTT(close combat tactical training) Man if X-box or play station got their hands on this, WOW gaming would be a whole new ball game nothing like it is now. It was just Awe inspiring. words cant describe how cool it was and this was 6 years ago imagine what they have now!!!

[edit on 15amu92007 by DaleGribble]

No offense to the Op but we've had way too many skeptics v believers threads on the forum to last us a lifetime. These types of threads just become polluted with circular arguments and name calling. They are largely unhelpful.

The ATS search facility is your friend!

IRM

reply to post by DaleGribble


So what you're basically saying is that it might be possible. I believe we think in the same direction. I believe it's important to share stories, but based on some proof or solid basis. But there are vehement skeptics which bash everything they throw to them, which ultimately leads me to wonder: how can they be SO sure? They must see that any of these assumptions are astoundingly ridiculous. So in real life it would take this and that for them to be real. That's what I want to read: why they're so incredibly wrong, and what would make them real, theoretically speaking and proofs aside.

[edit on 22-4-2009 by seb2882]

Can I just ask, what is the purpose of this post?

You give us 10 things to argue over, so if one looks 'dodgy' you simply switch over to one of the other 9 back ups and try to claim the high ground?

All 10 of your points have been discussed in length, and in all cases, more than once

Use your search feature, top right of the page.

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Like you, I dread of this becoming that kind of thread. That's why I titled it "Skeptics only", so this doesn't turn into a troll fest. And I searched and yet had to found my prime question:
Skeptic, what would make the believer claims on X subject true? What modification on the areas of technology, history, psychology, sociology, science, photography or any other field would have to be made for this to become an undeniable truth?

reply to post by seb2882


i thought that is what i was giving you.

i told you what helps change me from being a non-believer ot a beleiver on subjects. my story about the army what just an example of why people believe some things and no others. i dont want to speak for everyone however i have no problem speaking for myself. dont take this the wrong way and i agree with you on most subjects but your last post makes me think you are trying to change the subject of this thread. although i like this thread and i am very intrested in getting a little more insight on how other peoples minds work on this sight. thank you for posting this thread.

reply to post by Daisy-Lola


Same response as InfraRedMan: I don't have nor care to turn this into an argument of any kind. To further enlighten yourself on my thread, check this link Warp Drive, When
These would be the answers of my "belief" that humans can travel to other stars.
Now hardcorish skeptics often tell why something is not possible. I would like to have the opposite, meaningful, constructive answer: what would make it possible. It's not at all that hard to understand, and forgive me if this is a clone of another thread which covered this take on the topics, I really couldn't found it.

reply to post by DaleGribble


There, I edited out "that part" so nobody else has that suspicacy. I don't blame you for having it, I made this because I'm sick of GFL and that stuff. Thanks for your input and let's hope somebody else writes something constructive to this.

reply to post by seb2882


#9, the UFO thang, bugs me the most.

UFO means UNIDENTIFIED, does it not? Thus, how can someone make this huge leap from "unidentified" to "it must be ET" when they see (or think they see) something in the sky which they can not immediately identify? I mean, there are a thousand and one other more likely explanations than "it's ET in their flying saucer or triangle" or whatever the current trend in alien spacecraft is these days. If you KNOW it's ETs spacecraft, then ya shouldn't call it a UFO, but call it an IFO instead, right?

I've seen countless things in the sky in my lifetime that I could not identify, and I must say I could never call any of those unidentified objects alien spacecraft .. that would just be a lie. And, saying it is ET would also be a disservice in my quest to discover the truth.

Who knows what some of those sightings are, who can say for sure what those colorful flashing lights in the sky really are. Ya know, kites are shaped like triangles too. But to proclaim it MUST be ET in a flying saucer is just foolish. Unidentified is all it is until positively identified. UFO means WE DON'T KNOW. UFO does not mean alien spacecraft. How the term UFO got twisted into meaning it's ET is beyond me.

Until someone can prove it was ET, they really do not know and they should not proclaim it is something they do not know for sure. When someone says they saw a UFO, that's fine, but if what they really meant by that statement was is that they saw an alien spacecraft from another world, I tend to laugh, because they are just making THAT PART up.

reply to post by Divinorumus


Thanks for your reply. So what I would ask in return is, if you were the one claiming that UFO's are indeed ET or future man tripulated, how would you get to that conclusion?
Let me rephrase this so it doesn't sound idiotic: Suppose tomorrow you had an event or somehow found out that UFO's are indeed ET or from the future. Why would that be?


[edit on 22-4-2009 by seb2882]

reply to post by seb2882

You shouldn’t change your posts because of me, but thanks for clarifying, I guess what I was trying to get at was asking you what you wanted to hear. I could have gone about it in a better way my self. but now that you have straightened that out, I guess that questioned is now answered. Thank you.

reply to post by Gawdzilla


You do realize that this is conspricy theory forum? Everybody wants hardcore proof, including us "nuts", but these are the kind of subjects that can bring down regimes and whole ideologies. People dont just make this stuff up, well maybe some of it, but the 10 things listed are some of the hottest THEORIES going today. Most, if not all, will never be acknowledged as true. The reprocussions towards the government and other related parties are far too great. Unfortunate. Something tells me I could show you absolute, undeniable proof of something (one of the ten) and it would be met with nothing but negativity. It happens all the time on here and elsewhere. So my question is what would it REALLY take, or is it even possible.

Originally posted by bluwaterman
reply to post by Gawdzilla

 

You do realize that this is conspricy theory forum? Everybody wants hardcore proof, including us "nuts", but these are the kind of subjects that can bring down regimes and whole ideologies. People dont just make this stuff up, well maybe some of it, but the 10 things listed are some of the hottest THEORIES going today. Most, if not all, will never be acknowledged as true. The reprocussions towards the government and other related parties are far too great. Unfortunate. Something tells me I could show you absolute, undeniable proof of something (one of the ten) and it would be met with nothing but negativity. It happens all the time on here and elsewhere. So my question is what would it REALLY take, or is it even possible.

"nuts" was your term, not mine. But now that you've said I guess I said it, right?

Conspiracy site? Really? I didn't know. However, I'll ask again, why is it a bad thing to ask for proof?

Originally posted by seb2882
So what I would ask in return is, if you were the one claiming that UFO's are indeed ET or future man tripulated, how would you get to that conclusion?
Let me rephrase this so it doesn't sound idiotic: Suppose tomorrow you had an event or somehow found out that UFO's are indeed ET or from the future. Why would that be?

It would have to landed and ET would have to get out and introduce him or herself (or whatever) to me and show me their spacecraft. The evidence would have to be what a court would accept as evidence .. not hearsay or wild speculation or guesses.

I know how easily we can sometimes be fooled, and how mistaken we sometimes can be. There were even times I thought I saw a shadow person .. until I backed up to take a second glance and realized it was my own shadow that spooked me, ha. I've even taken pictures with my camera and captured with others would call mystical orbs, but further investigation proved that what I had captured was simply my flash reflecting off of dust or bugs floating past the camera lens that were overexposed because of their close proximity to the lens and flash, or merely an external light reflecting off the camera lens.

Some of them UFOs just might be alien spacecraft, but until we actually know for sure, we're just guessing and making assumptions, and that is no proof .. ask any court. I mean, you wouldn't want to be convicted of a crime based upon someone saying they think they saw you do it, that the perpetrator sure looked like you. Evidence should leave no room for doubt.

You both have good points, but lets please stay on-topic.
What would you, bluwaterman, do to validate any of these things? As you ask, what would be your proof on any of these subjects

And you, Gawdzilla, is there a particular theme that you know it's impossible to prove because of X? Maybe a tech breakthrough, evidence that proves otherwise, etc?

Originally posted by seb2882And you, Gawdzilla, is there a particular theme that you know it's impossible to prove because of X? Maybe a tech breakthrough, evidence that proves otherwise, etc?

I'm a skeptic, I don't think anything is "impossible". However, do I think some things are likely? No. If a sudden "tech breakthrough" appears, out of the blue, so to speak, it would be interested, but the devil is in the details, which are only speculation at this point.